Srsly though if you were expecting an answer: The majority of your diet can't / shouldn't be flesh of any kind, because you, being a human, are an omnivore and not a carnivore. Therefore you shouldn't eat flesh exclusively.

(10-01-2013 01:26 AM)poolboyg88 Wrote: Not too long ago I finished reading 'Stranger in a Strange Land', and watched 'Book of Eli', both with minimal scenes dealing with cannibalism (one spiritual, the other survival).

My question is, health wise, why is cannibalism unhealthy? Why can't the majority (not sole food source, but a large part of it) of your diet be human flesh?

I understand vague theories that diseases and toxins are transmitted easier (same species, so more compatible), or there's no nutritional value in the flesh.

Oh ok. I see now... Stranger in a Strange Land... right. Yea ok, that book can be pretty persuasive.

However, eating human flesh ... probably wouldn't be unhealthy but - who are you going to eat? - might be a more appropriate question. I mean, you can't just eat someone you know, it just wouldn't be right. You can't eat someone judged guilty of a crime; they don't deserve to die just because you want lunch. So, who?

Bottom line: Stranger in a Strange Land is a fucking book. It also espoused following a hippy cult leader who if I recall correctly, was a Jebus wannabe... and we all know how well his book screwed up history for the last 2000 years. Books are nice; they contain some good ideas but if you don't want someone eating you, well then you probably won't want to be thinking about eating someone.

Verily I say unto thee: Eat the flesh of others only if you want to be eaten yourself.

A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels. ~ Albert Einstein

I assume we're talking about necrophagy (eating the dead of one's own species) or more accurately for humans, anthropophagy (eating humans). Cannibalism specifically means you kill and eat the member of your own species, but I doubt we're concerned with who does the killing or even whether the meal is deceased at the time of eating.

You can get diseases from eating any flesh. Unpreserved carrion is more likely to cause all kinds of diseases than fresh meat, and this is true regardless of whether the food source is conspecific. Also, uncooked meat is far more likely to transmit diseases to the consumer than fresh meat. So if you're going to eat meat, make sure it's fresh or well preserved and be sure to cook it well.

Assuming you do that, there is still greater risk when eating meat of your own species. Kuru is probably the most well known example. It is related to Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. Both of these are transmitted through prions acquired from diseased human brains. They are very similar to Bovine spongiform encephalopathy (Mad Cow Disease) acquired from cow brains. They are also incurable and fatal.

Also note that these diseases infect the entire spinal cord including all spinal fluid. While most of us rarely eat brain, the general butchery of cattle includes severing the spine which causes the spinal fluid to contaminate a great deal of flesh of the entire animal. Likewise, procuring meat from a human would have the same risk.

On the plus side, every human race has elevated genetic resistance to prions. This can only mean that we were on our own menu for a significant period of our evolution. Also, since natural cannibalism is almost exclusively a one-on-one event in other species (e.g. the black widow eating her mate after mating), this is a poor method of widespread disease transmission, going from one host to only one host. Which means our ancestors definitely ate their deceased in group settings, such as a whole tribe eating the flesh of a recently deceased tribe member, or a recently captured rival tribe member.

Resistance notwithstanding, outbreaks of Kuru have been documented as recently as 60 years ago (Papua New Guinea) so we're clearly not immune to these diseases.

So, if you must go cannibalistic, I suggest avoiding the brain and being extremely careful around the spinal cord (unless you're eating Ray Liotta's brain which has been demonstrated to be prion-free; Anthony Hopkins is still alive and well). Prions are very resistant to damage caused by cooking, so you can't even cook away the disease.

"Whores perform the same function as priests, but far more thoroughly." - Robert A. Heinlein

I tend to think you are a troll, however I will answer you anyway. I could not eat another human, because I have seen what they eat and the daily habits of many really make me lose my appetite. If it meant not starving to death, I would if desperate eat another person. We are animals and animals are meet. It is just that cows don't smoke cigarette's or abuse alcohol and other drugs. Honestly, I am not sure I could find another human clean enough to eat. Well at least I am not hungry any more.

I recommend that users who are bored and have nothing to input, to refrain from posting. At least be "humerus" about it (ba-dum-ch!). Next time, please read the post.

Aseptic Skeptic,

Technical terms aside, it seems that eating human flesh (cooked of course, and recently fresh) has no greater risk than any other animal. But I'm still lost on what exactly "Kuru" is. Does it occur no matter how healthy the person is (a disease that nearly everyone has, and so becomes concentrated in one person when eaten), or is it just in the "sick" (you can't tell who is sick, so it's like playing cannibal russian roulette)?